Windmills dismal performance (hydrogen, cost, environmental, electric)

[Cosmic]

Windmills might not work in WV, not every region will be the optimum site for that alternative.

It does sound like they never did enough prototyping, pilot type plant work to fully understand the technology as it would be sited. Not everything works as planned on paper or in some other location. They could have planned it with some pumped storage or other storage method to compensate for outage periods. Too many politicals not enough good engineers at the helm.

Maybe many areas need to reconsider nuclear options. We should have developed the newer methods of using Pebble Bed Gas Cooled Reactor technology at max speed and effort. Nuclear is still one of the best real proven technologies available, the newer designs are far superior to what was available and presently used. Funding those in some sort of "Pre-Paid" method might be the best option.

Windmills work fine in the right locations, we are not going to be able to do without them in the future.

[Tek_Freek]

So if I read this correctly, the Great Citizens of West Virginia elected a governor that espouses wind energy in a state that cannot viably sustain it, then they complain because he is pushing the project?

Uuuummmmm, Duh!

[rlchurch]

Actually the wind projects in WV are exceeding planned generation. There isn't a problem.

[thecoalman]

Originally Posted by Cosmic

Too many politicals .............

<enters carny voice> We have a winnerrrrrrrr!

They have these windmills ringing our valley where I live. I haven't seen any numbers but the damn things are sitting still more often than not.

[Tek_Freek]

Originally Posted by rlchurch

Actually the wind projects in WV are exceeding planned generation. There isn't a problem.

Interesting. I suppose it depends on the definition of "planned generation". From what I've read they're sitting there not spinning most of the time.

[rlchurch]

Originally Posted by Tek_Freek

Interesting. I suppose it depends on the definition of "planned generation". From what I've read they're sitting there not spinning most of the time.

If you looked at your local utility's combustion turbines, you'd find they weren't operating most of the time either.

Before someone puts up a wind farm they spend a year or two collecting wind data for that specific site. That's factored into the financial projections developed for the sites. The vast majority of these projects are built by independent producers. If the turbine doesn't run they don't get paid. The performance of the projects in WV is pretty much spot-on to what the planning studies said to expect. The investors are making money and building more farms.

[thecoalman]

Originally Posted by rlchurch

The investors are making money and building more farms.

Paid by whom though? If you go back to that 2007 report from the EIA wind is subsidized to the tune of nearly $24/MWh. With the average retail price hovering above $90 in 2007 you're effectively adding almost 30% to the bottom line of retail sales. e.g that electricity cost the end consumer $114 since the subsidies are paid by them.

[rlchurch]

Originally Posted by thecoalman

Paid by whom though? If you go back to that 2007 report from the EIA wind is subsidized to the tune of nearly $24/MWh. With the average retail price hovering above $90 in 2007 you're effectively adding almost 30% to the bottom line of retail sales. e.g that electricity cost the end consumer $114 since the subsidies are paid by them.

As I said before. I'm buying that wind you're complaining about and it cost me 1¢/kWh more than undifferentiated power.

Coal get a big subsidy, even before we consider GHGs, by being able to pollute.

Nuclear has huge subsidies and always has. You can't get private insurance for a nuclear plant. The government has always provided that.

Oil doesn't pay the cost of our military presence in the Middle East, to the recent tune of $100 Billions/year.

[thecoalman]

Originally Posted by rlchurch

As I said before. I'm buying that wind you're complaining about and it cost me 1¢/kWh more than undifferentiated power.

So your argument is that in addtion to the federal tax subsidy paid by me and other taxpayers there is additional voluntary subsidies paid by yourself and other that is hiding the costs further. Thank you so much for pointing that out.

The coal subsidy FYI is $0.44/MWh which is a stark contrast to the nearly $24/MWh that wind gets.... at least in 2007. You should know this by now since I have already pointed it out numerous times.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/servicer...df/execsum.pdf

[rlchurch]

Originally Posted by thecoalman

So your argument is that in addtion to the federal tax subsidy paid by me and other taxpayers there is additional voluntary subsidies paid by yourself and other that is hiding the costs further. Thank you so much for pointing that out.

The coal subsidy FYI is $0.44/MWh which is a stark contrast to the nearly $24/MWh that wind gets.... at least in 2007. You should know this by now since I have already pointed it out numerous times.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/servicer...df/execsum.pdf

You are quoting the wrong number. If you check with the EPA in their clear skies program, you'll find some data on the cost of the pollution that coal plants produce. They estimate potential health costs of continuing the status quo of over $100 Billion per year.